All,
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 00:55, Stefan Hakansson LK
<stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> wrote:
> On 12/13/2011 04:46 PM, Rich Tibbett wrote:
>>
>> Rich Tibbett wrote:
>>>
>>> We seem to have lost hints in the getusermedia specification. Was the
>>> ability for a developer to provide a hint for a particular camera (the
>>> 'user' or 'environment' camera) removed for a reason?
>
> I can't remember a reason; I think it had more to do with lack of time, and
> to do the basics first and then add more.
>
I've been following up the discussions related to the camera
options(maybe, hints in our language), but cannot pin down the reason
why these options (i.e., user or environment) have been removed in the
latest draft. As Rich pointed out earlier, I would love to have these
options becoming available for the next draft update.
Any comments?
Kind regards,
Soo-Hyun
>
>>> In the
>>> string-based options proposal we had the following:
>>>
>>> e.g. navigator.getUserMedia('video;view=environment', gotMedia);
>
> There have also been audio related hints discussed on the list; e.g. "voip"
> (would use noise suppression and AGC techniques, and code for a speech
> signal) vs. "audio" (would not).
>
>>>
>>> Do we have a similar proposal in the object options model? I've included
>>> 3 models below that we could adopt and I'd be interested if anyone has a
>>> preferred model at this point that we can agree to implement:
>>>
>>> navigator.getUserMedia({"audio": true, "video": "environment"},
>>> gotMedia);
>>>
>>> navigator.getUserMedia({"audio": true, "video": {type: "environment"}},
>>> gotMedia);
>>>
>>> navigator.getUserMedia({"audio": true, "video": "environment", "type":
>>> "environment"}, gotMedia);
>>
>>
>> There's a typo above. The third proposal should read:
>>
>> navigator.getUserMedia({"audio": true, "video": true, "type":
>> "environment"}, gotMedia);
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> br/ Rich
>>>
>>
>
>